Related
im sure google has been talking with tmobile and htc about 4g, whether it be wimax or LTE. can anyone confirm if it supports either? not only would that make the phone more awesome, but we could be more certain on tmobile 4g plans. i mean sprint already has it on the pre, and google gave the n1 specs to beat out most opponents (asside from the hd2, but i dont think that supports 4g either :/ never looked).
any idea or confirmations would be welcome
damn. oh well, the 3g boost is good enough for now
What a bollocks question. Networks won't be that mature for AT LEAST 18months.
LOL. i didnt think it would, but it wouldnt surprise me if google did have htc put it in
Knowing HTC they will stop supporting this phone in 6 months. £100 says the Nexus 2 will be out by Christmas.
firedup said:
What a bollocks question. Networks won't be that mature for AT LEAST 18months.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True but some consumers buy into Sprint commercials about 4G.
alexjzim said:
im sure google has been talking with tmobile and htc about 4g, whether it be wimax or LTE. can anyone confirm if it supports either? not only would that make the phone more awesome, but we could be more certain on tmobile 4g plans. i mean sprint already has it on the pre, and google gave the n1 specs to beat out most opponents (asside from the hd2, but i dont think that supports 4g either :/ never looked).
any idea or confirmations would be welcome
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
T-Mobile has no intentions, as of right now, of going to 4G. Its simply not needed. Explanation: Sprint and Verizon are CDMA technologies. CDMA (Code Devision Multipable Access) has a 2.5MHz bandwidth. With that they use EVDO for thier 3G data rates but because of the bandwidth of CDMA they are very limited on their max download speeds. With that said, both carriers will have to go to 4G, WiMAX or LTE, in order to achive high data rates.
On to T-Mobile: T-Mobile has recently installed a UMTS 3G network which uses WCDMA (Wideband Code Division Multiple Access). WCDMA has a 5Mhz bandwidth which, by easy math, is double the capability of Verizon and Sprint. UMTS uses a technology called HSPA+ for its data. HSPA+ is capable of download speeds up to 48Mbps. As of right now, T-Mobile is making efforts to seriously increase their data speeds using HSPA+ and as of right now T-Mobile has HSPA+ launched in Philidalphia and is getting great reviews.
So, with all of that said, hold on because by the end of this year T-Mobile will probably have the fastest network.
Why 4g on a phone, if 3.5G 7.2Mbps worked fully, its more than enough, for youtube, iplayer and daytoday surfing.
22Mbps from mobile, networks - its a joke max speed will be about 4-6Mbps if one is lucky and much less in most areas
tigger80 said:
Why 4g on a phone, if 3.5G 7.2Mbps worked fully, its more than enough, for youtube, iplayer and daytoday surfing.
22Mbps from mobile, networks - its a joke max speed will be about 4-6Mbps if one is lucky and much less in most areas
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
7.2Mbps is enough for everyone, just like 640k, right?
setzer715 said:
T-Mobile has no intentions, as of right now, of going to 4G. Its simply not needed. Explanation: Sprint and Verizon are CDMA technologies. CDMA (Code Devision Multipable Access) has a 2.5MHz bandwidth. With that they use EVDO for thier 3G data rates but because of the bandwidth of CDMA they are very limited on their max download speeds. With that said, both carriers will have to go to 4G, WiMAX or LTE, in order to achive high data rates.
On to T-Mobile: T-Mobile has recently installed a UMTS 3G network which uses WCDMA (Wideband Code Division Multiple Access). WCDMA has a 5Mhz bandwidth which, by easy math, is double the capability of Verizon and Sprint. UMTS uses a technology called HSPA+ for its data. HSPA+ is capable of download speeds up to 48Mbps. As of right now, T-Mobile is making efforts to seriously increase their data speeds using HSPA+ and as of right now T-Mobile has HSPA+ launched in Philidalphia and is getting great reviews.
So, with all of that said, hold on because by the end of this year T-Mobile will probably have the fastest network.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So when all this happens according to planned, and hoping it will. Will current phones now(Nexus One) be able to benefit to the new speeds?
not necessarily all current phones, but the nexus one does... when you take a look at the specs, there is HSDPA and HSUPA... the more common nomenclature would be HSPA+ and HSPA as some people like to put it...
with the upgraded network speeds that t-mobile announced as of the fifth, my average download speed has jumped from 600kbps max to 1 mbps on my nexus one... a pretty hefty improvement, and its only gonna get better... don't really see the need to upgrade to anything faster at the moment because most cell companies can't handle the load of data thats going across their networks as is... they upgrade speed, they have to upgrade capacity too and that means more hardware, its not as simple as swapping to HSPA+
motivecc said:
not necessarily all current phones, but the nexus one does... when you take a look at the specs, there is HSDPA and HSUPA... the more common nomenclature would be HSPA+ and HSPA as some people like to put it...
with the upgraded network speeds that t-mobile announced as of the fifth, my average download speed has jumped from 600kbps max to 1 mbps on my nexus one... a pretty hefty improvement, and its only gonna get better... don't really see the need to upgrade to anything faster at the moment because most cell companies can't handle the load of data thats going across their networks as is... they upgrade speed, they have to upgrade capacity too and that means more hardware, its not as simple as swapping to HSPA+
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HSPA (High Speed Packet Access) and HSPA+ (Evolved High Speed Packet Access) are actually 2 different things. HSPA is capable of up to 14Mbps down while HSPA+ is capable of up to 54Mbps down. T-Mobile is currently running HSPA nation wide and running HSPA+ in Philidalphia. T-Mobile hopes to be running HSPA+ nation wide. HSDPA and HSUPA are simply HSPA with the D for Download or U for Upload added to the acronym to differntiate the different up and down speeds.
laztpn0i said:
So when all this happens according to planned, and hoping it will. Will current phones now(Nexus One) be able to benefit to the new speeds?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, any phone that is currently rated at HSDPA of 7.2Mbps or 4Mbps will bennifit from the upgrade.
ivarmedi said:
7.2Mbps is enough for everyone, just like 640k, right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
On a mobile device, where there are other factors involved, such as cpu and other performance components.
My phone speedtest gets 15Mb on wifi and about 3.5Mb on 3G but the real life speed when using the internet seems much slower even with wifi because the device can't handle or process the web pages as fast as a PC, also i doubt people will use rapidshare on the phone where speed matters,
For genral surfing a good 1MB connection is enough for mobile devices, i think anyway.
I use usb modems by huawei i have many most have 7.2Mbs with vodafone i get 3-5Mbps but still seems very slow, mostly due to the ping which are normally in the 300ms+
ADSL/DSL is best for speed, mobile BB even at 50Mbps will not compare to 20Mbps DSL line. As DSL is much more stable and Mobile BB is NOT very stable
setzer715 said:
T-Mobile has no intentions, as of right now, of going to 4G. Its simply not needed. Explanation: Sprint and Verizon are CDMA technologies. CDMA (Code Devision Multipable Access) has a 2.5MHz bandwidth. With that they use EVDO for thier 3G data rates but because of the bandwidth of CDMA they are very limited on their max download speeds. With that said, both carriers will have to go to 4G, WiMAX or LTE, in order to achive high data rates.
On to T-Mobile: T-Mobile has recently installed a UMTS 3G network which uses WCDMA (Wideband Code Division Multiple Access). WCDMA has a 5Mhz bandwidth which, by easy math, is double the capability of Verizon and Sprint. UMTS uses a technology called HSPA+ for its data. HSPA+ is capable of download speeds up to 48Mbps. As of right now, T-Mobile is making efforts to seriously increase their data speeds using HSPA+ and as of right now T-Mobile has HSPA+ launched in Philidalphia and is getting great reviews.
So, with all of that said, hold on because by the end of this year T-Mobile will probably have the fastest network.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Now if they could just get 3g in my area this year.....
Personally, I'm not happy that Sprint has decided to go with WiMax. On one hand, we've always been kind of blocked from using imported phones... but on the other hand, Sprint wasn't the only CDMA carrier in America, and there were enough other companies using CDMA elsewhere in the world to ensure that we got to have phones that were at least as cool (often, better) than what Europeans could buy for GSM (especially with regard to the first PalmOS PDA phones, and generally with regard to Windows Mobile PDA phones).
As far as I can tell, Sprint is the only carrier on *earth* going with WiMax instead of LTE. It's one thing to be limited to the same phones used by Verizon, just about everyone in South Korea, plus half of Australia, South America, and a big part of China. It's another matter *entirely* to be the only 20-40 million people on Earth stuck with phones that literally have no market anyplace besides Sprint in the US.
I remember going to an AT&T Wireless store with a coworker in 2004, right before they switched to GSM. I looked around the store, and couldn't *believe* anyone wouldn't take one look at the 20th-century relics they were still selling to new customers and run from the store screaming. That's what being REALLY "ghetto-ized" means.
We won't even be able to ***** about Sprint not supporting R-UIM cards, because there won't be any non-Sprint phones that are even capable of working on Sprint.
I've been a Sprint user since ~1999, and it really hurts to think I might eventually be forced to choose between leaving Sprint or settling for a second-rate phone that sucks as badly as AT&T's TDMA phones did relative to the phones Sprint, Verizon, and even T-Mobile had at the same time.
The biggest selling point I've seen for WiMax so far is the fantasies some people have that it will replace WiFi... totally overlooking the fact that people don't use WiFi because it's the best... they use it because it's free. It uses internet connectivity that someone's already paying for, and enables its use in more ways. It's the same reason "3G tablets" are going to flop (in the short term, at least) in America, unless they can ALSO use WiFi and tether to cell phones. Very, very few people are going to willingly throw down $500 for a new device that requires yet another new $10-40/month fee to use it unless it's literally god's gift to the computing universe. AFAIK, nothing remotely close to being *that* cool is hitting the market anytime soon.
firedup said:
Knowing HTC they will stop supporting this phone in 6 months. £100 says the Nexus 2 will be out by Christmas.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bet $200 that it'll be out by June.
OK so I just payed my bill at my local T-mobile store, and I saw a poster saying 16 tmobile devices will have 4g capability or something in those words... So I asked the tmobile employee what the poster is all about. He said there are 16 devices that tmobile will be updating so they can have faster 3g or 4g speed.... He said for vibrant the 3g should get faster but its not going to be 4g sicnce it doesnt have the capability to be 4g...... plus Vibrant was one of those phones on the poster as well as other smart phones.
No Im not trying to spam or create new rumors. Im actually a newb in these threads and was curious if anyone heard of this.... Or if it has anything to do with second update that some people are receiving?
As the employee said expect ota update that would increase the speed
they're updating the network, not the actual devices. the vibrant is technically capable of 7.2Mbps downloads, but you can only find those speeds in a few places right now
lolcopter said:
they're updating the network, not the actual devices. the vibrant is technically capable of 7.2Mbps downloads, but you can only find those speeds in a few places right now
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well im pretty confused by all this myself but.. Since they have the tmobile official posters in their tmobile stores it means it has to be pretty soon.. w.e it is...
I just went and tested my speed with speedtest.net app and it shows 2284kbps download and 1337 upload.... is it suppose to be even faster soon?
I may be wrong but I believe you guys are misunderstanding the posters.
I think this is what T-Mobile is trying to say.
All current 3G phones will get a speed boost once your area has been fully upgraded to HSPA+ Although most phones that T-Mobile currently carries are not HSPA+ except for the G2 and MyTouch 4G, these non-HSPA+ phones will still benefit from HSPA+ network upgrades.
Make sense?
Also T-Mobiles 4G network is NOT 4G, False advertising. Same with Sprint Wimax.
SamsungVibrant said:
Also T-Mobiles 4G network is NOT 4G, False advertising. Same with Sprint Wimax.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According to ITU, none of the American carriers have 4G. Go search engadget for ITU for the source (would post the link, but I don't have enough posts yet).
HSPA+ is capable of the same download speeds as the "true 4G" networks, of which there are NONE in the US. It's not false advertising, it's perfectly honest advertising.
Either way...no one is promising 4g speed to vibrant... Just faster 3g... Did anyone great of this? Coz I dont want to start a thread where people are arguimg what 4g is and what its not... And I live in NYC... So I believe 4g towers are set up here already.. Tmobile rep confused the crap out of me... As they usually do... Can't even understand their own advertisement
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
thats interesting because at my work for the last year I could only get about 900kbps down and 300 up. For some reason for the last 3 weeks I could not keep a solid connection even though the 3g symbol was present. I thought it was my vibrant or the rom I had flashed the night before (rom junkie) but two of my employees have Tmobile as well and they were experiencing the same thing. All of a sudden as of Saturday I am now getting speeds in the 4mb range and its freaking awesome. I have another employee with a 4g Evo and I kill him everytime. Go Tmobile! Vibrant w/4g speeds and now froyo and wifi calling= the best Android phone on the market.
Your statements contradict eachother!
Thegreatheed said:
According to ITU, none of the American carriers have 4G. Go search engadget for ITU for the source (would post the link, but I don't have enough posts yet).
HSPA+ is capable of the same download speeds as the "true 4G" networks, of which there are NONE in the US. It's not false advertising, it's perfectly honest advertising.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I never said any of the US carriers currently have 4G. In fact, I said exactly what you stated. I said neither Sprint's Wimax, nor T-Mobiles HSPA+ is 4G.
Also your statements contradict each other. You claim according to the ITU, no us carrier has 4G, yet T-Mobile advertising as the "largest 4G network" in the nation is honest advertising? HUH? LOL, do you not see the contradiction in your own statements?
How can you be the largest 4G network, if according to you, the ITU says no US carriers have 4G at the current moment. As a result, any carrier claiming they have 4G would be falsely advertising such said information.
I'm sorry but it shocks me when people overlook the obvious, how can you write a statement and contradict yourself?
btw hspa+ SPEEDS are not true 4G speeds.
short answer, they upgrade network we benefit.
Thegreatheed said:
According to ITU, none of the American carriers have 4G. Go search engadget for ITU for the source (would post the link, but I don't have enough posts yet).
HSPA+ is capable of the same download speeds as the "true 4G" networks, of which there are NONE in the US. It's not false advertising, it's perfectly honest advertising.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is absolutely FALSE advertising. 4G networks are IMT ADVANCED based, which includes LTE Advanced and WiMax Advanced. This means that ABSOLUTELY zero networks in the world are, and in the next year or two, ever will be 4G. To be a 4G solution, it has to be a 100% IP (aka packet switched with absolutely NO circuit switched voice) based solution. Also, do I need to mention that the "true" 4G speeds you are talking about, are slow in comparison to what IMT Advanced based architectures will be.
AlexSochi8 said:
Either way...no one is promising 4g speed to vibrant... Just faster 3g... Did anyone great of this? Coz I dont want to start a thread where people are arguimg what 4g is and what its not... And I live in NYC... So I believe 4g towers are set up here already.. Tmobile rep confused the crap out of me... As they usually do... Can't even understand their own advertisement
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As mentioned they are not 4G. Plain and simple. T-Mobile has made it VERY clear that they are not currently seeking any LTE plans for the very near future, and as such, are rolling out HSPA+ in an effort to increase the speeds at a (relatively) low cost. Due to the fact that Sprint is using the 4G moniker, and advertising speeds similar to what T-Mobile will have on offer (using HSPA+), they are doing the same bull**** marketing that Sprint is.
If you want me to cite some info, I can.
lolcopter said:
they're updating the network, not the actual devices. the vibrant is technically capable of 7.2Mbps downloads, but you can only find those speeds in a few places right now
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So as soon as they fully install the faster network in New York City then i will be able to get up to 7.2mbps on vibrant?
I kinda doubt that since now at very best I get 2.2mbps in a very tower rich city
That would make vibrant internet speed upto 3.5 times faster? Is that really likely?
If that is then Froyo + faster internet is all i can dream of!
AlexSochi8 said:
So as soon as they fully install the faster network in New York City then i will be able to get up to 7.2mbps on vibrant?
I kinda doubt that since now at very best I get 2.2mbps in a very tower rich city
That would make vibrant internet speed upto 3.5 times faster? Is that really likely?
If that is then Froyo + faster internet is all i can dream of!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are reports of getting as high as 15Mbps in areas with a good HSPA+ coverage on the G2. I presume that 7Mbps, or near there should be very achievable on our phones.
gehzumteufel said:
There are reports of getting as high as 15Mbps in areas with a good HSPA+ coverage on the G2. I presume that 7Mbps, or near there should be very achievable on our phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thats pretty amazing then... then I wouldnt complain about some phones having "4G" speed
gehzumteufel said:
It is absolutely FALSE advertising. 4G networks are IMT ADVANCED based, which includes LTE Advanced and WiMax Advanced. This means that ABSOLUTELY zero networks in the world are, and in the next year or two, ever will be 4G. To be a 4G solution, it has to be a 100% IP (aka packet switched with absolutely NO circuit switched voice) based solution. Also, do I need to mention that the "true" 4G speeds you are talking about, are slow in comparison to what IMT Advanced based architectures will be.
As mentioned they are not 4G. Plain and simple. T-Mobile has made it VERY clear that they are not currently seeking any LTE plans for the very near future, and as such, are rolling out HSPA+ in an effort to increase the speeds at a (relatively) low cost. Due to the fact that Sprint is using the 4G moniker, and advertising speeds similar to what T-Mobile will have on offer (using HSPA+), they are doing the same bull**** marketing that Sprint is.
If you want me to cite some info, I can.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you in one respect, ITU ruled that HSPA+ is not a 4G network. However, what with Sprint and their false advertising, it's easy to see why T-Mobile would label their data network as 4G for one reason. The same towers that are being upgraded to the theoretical max of 21mbps have the capacity for even higher speeds. Up to 168mbps actually, if you want to get specific. All on the towers they already have. Pretty much explains their decision to forgo LTE for the time being huh? So while yes, their network isn't a "true" 4G network, no one can argue that they're lying about achieving 4G and higher speeds (even higher than WiMax).
well i hope the reception will be better. i'm fine with a download speed of 2-3 mbps as long as it's stable. I have to stay on one corner of our house to have a 3G.
Homestar1217 said:
I agree with you in one respect, ITU ruled that HSPA+ is not a 4G network. However, what with Sprint and their false advertising, it's easy to see why T-Mobile would label their data network as 4G for one reason. The same towers that are being upgraded to the theoretical max of 21mbps have the capacity for even higher speeds. Up to 168mbps actually, if you want to get specific. All on the towers they already have. Pretty much explains their decision to forgo LTE for the time being huh? So while yes, their network isn't a "true" 4G network, no one can argue that they're lying about achieving 4G and higher speeds (even higher than WiMax).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They are absolutely lying. You can't achieve, from a device, anything above a theoretical maximum of 84Mbps with bonding AND MIMO. Otherwise, you are stick at 42Mbps with JUST boding, and 21.5 with no bonding or MIMO. 4G is officially designated at 100Mbps while moving at high speed and 1Gbps while static. You aren't going to see bonding and MIMO at all, because that requires a HUGE increase in the backhaul capabilities (100GbE minimum), and all new antennas and base stations. This is just not happening.
iynfynity said:
well i hope the reception will be better. i'm fine with a download speed of 2-3 mbps as long as it's stable. I have to stay on one corner of our house to have a 3G.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
T-Mobile has been significantly improving their coverage area over the last 5 years, and it is far better than when I first had it. In due time, they will cover most of the US.
yeah, Edge is good for me but of course 3G is what i'm paying for so i hope that the reception will be better in my place.
My speed on my stock Vibrant seems to have improved just recently. Sitting inside my house in the Seattle area tonight the Speedtest.net app gave results of: 5.3-5.4 Mbps down and 1.6-1.7 Mbps up. That was the range for several successive trials. The weird thing was that when I laid the phone down on my desk, the speed dropped down to about 3.2 Mbps down and 0.70 Mbps up. When I picked it up and held it in my hand again, the speed climbed right back up to the higher range, which I verified several times. Coincidence, or could there be some body-phone-antenna thing going on?
ZX3ZX4 said:
My speed on my stock Vibrant seems to have improved just recently. Sitting inside my house in the Seattle area tonight the Speedtest.net app gave results of: 5.3-5.4 Mbps down and 1.6-1.7 Mbps up. That was the range for several successive trials. The weird thing was that when I laid the phone down on my desk, the speed dropped down to about 3.2 Mbps down and 0.70 Mbps up. When I picked it up and held it in my hand again, the speed climbed right back up to the higher range, which I verified several times. Coincidence, or could there be some body-phone-antenna thing going on?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, your phone is probably cycling through two different towers. Check to see if your CID changes (Ever) in your home.
AlexSochi8 said:
So as soon as they fully install the faster network in New York City then i will be able to get up to 7.2mbps on vibrant?
I kinda doubt that since now at very best I get 2.2mbps in a very tower rich city
That would make vibrant internet speed upto 3.5 times faster? Is that really likely?
If that is then Froyo + faster internet is all i can dream of!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
By my old place in Brooklyn I was getting up to 5Mbs down back in July, but my apartment was like a Faraday Cage, by my folks in Brooklyn I am constantly getting up to 5.5Mbs, and at my new place in South Brooklyn I am back to harsh reality with 1.1Mbs at best.
These are the download speeds, upload is usually stays the same at around 1.3Mbs
Many of us are so geeked about 4G speeds....the mytouch 4G sprouting about its HSPA+ network which is supposed to make this a better phone and such, but it's all hogwash. I found the article below very interesting and rather revealing as to how these carriers manage to soup us up and get us to believe what they want us to believe, true or not. Sad, but very enlightening.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- You've seen the 4G advertisements from T-Mobile, Sprint and Verizon, bragging about a much-better wireless network with blazing fast speeds.
Here's the secret the carriers don't advertise: 4G is a myth. Like the unicorn, it hasn't been spotted anywhere in the wild just yet -- and won't be any time in the near future.
The International Telecommunication Union, the global wireless standards-setting organization, determined last month that 4G is defined as a network capable of download speeds of 100 megabits per second (Mbps). That's fast enough to download an average high-definition movie in about three minutes.
None of the new networks the carriers are rolling out meet that standard.
Sprint (S, Fortune 500) was the first to launch a network called 4G, going live with it earlier this year. Then, T-Mobile launched its 4G network, claiming to be "America's largest 4G network." Verizon (VZ, Fortune 500) plans to launch its 4G network by the end of the year, which it claims will be the nation's largest and the fastest. AT&T (T, Fortune 500) is expected to unveil its 4G network next year.
Those networks have theoretical speeds of a fifth to a half that of the official 4G standard. The actual speeds the carriers say they'll achieve are just a tenth of "real" 4G.
So why are the carriers calling these networks 4G?
It's mostly a matter of PR, industry experts say. Explaining what the wireless carriers' new networks should be called, and what they'll be capable of, is a confusing mess.
To illustrate: Sprint bought a majority stake in Clearwire (CLWR), which uses a new network technology called WiMAX that's capable of speeds ranging from 3 Mbps to 10 Mbps. That's a different technology from Verizon's new network, based on a standard called Long Term Evolution (LTE), which will average 5 Mbps to 12 Mbps.
Seeing what its competitors were up to, T-Mobile opted to increase the speed capabilities of its existing 3G-HSPA+ network instead of pursuing a new technology. Its expanded network -- now called 4G -- will reach speeds of 5 Mbps to 12 Mbps.
No matter what they're called, all of these upgrades are clear improvements -- and the carriers shelled out billions to make them. Current "3G" networks offer actual speeds that range from between 500 kilobits per second to 1.5 Mbps.
So Sprint and Verizon have new, faster networks that are still technically not 4G, while T-Mobile has an old, though still faster network that is actually based on 3G technology.
Confused yet? That's why they all just opted to call themselves "4G."
The carriers get defensive about the topic.
"It's very misleading to make a decision about what's 4G based on speed alone," said Stephanie Vinge-Walsh, spokeswoman for Sprint Nextel. "It is a challenge we face in an extremely competitive industry."
T-Mobile did not respond to a request for comment.
One network representative, who asked not to be identified, claimed that ITU's 4G line-in-the-sand is being misconstrued. The organization previously approved the use of the term "4G" for Sprint's WiMAX and Verizon's LTE networks, he said -- though not for T-Mobile's HSPA+ network.
ITU's PR department ignored that approval in its recent statement about how future wireless technologies would be measured, the representative said. ITU representatives were not immediately available for comment.
"I'm not getting into a technical debate," said Jeffrey Nelson, spokesman for Verizon Wireless. "Consumers will quickly realize that there's really a difference between the capabilities of various wireless data networks. All '4G' is not the same."
And that's what's so difficult. The term 4G has become meaningless and confusing as hell for wireless customers.
For instance, T-Mobile's 4G network, which is technically 3G, will have speeds that are at least equal to -- and possibly faster -- than Verizon's 4G-LTE network at launch. At the same time, AT&T's 3G network, which is also being scaled up like T-Mobile's, is not being labeled "4G."
That's why some industry experts predict that the term "4G" will soon vanish.
"The labeling of wireless broadband based on technical jargon is likely to fade away in 2011," said Dan Hays, partner at industry consultancy PRTM. "That will be good news for the consumer. Comparing carriers based on their network coverage and speed will give them more facts to make more informed decisions."
Hays expects that independent researchers -- or the Federal Communications Commission -- will step in next year to perform speed and coverage tests.
Meanwhile, don't expect anyone to hold the carriers' feet to the fire.
"Historically, ITU's classification system has not held a great degree of water and has not been used to enforce branding," Hays said. "Everyone started off declaring themselves to be 4G long before the official decision on labeling was made. The ITU was three to four years too late to make an meaningful impact on the industry's use of the term."
I understand all that. But here is my newbie question:
Can the 4G TMo devices (say myTouch4G or G2) really attain quicker d/l speeds than a 3G device like Vibrant? If so, how?
I have not been able to read a clear explanation of this anywhere. Also, TMo says their network will hit 21Mbps in 2011, and that is backward compatible. If so, then why is a 4G device needed?
Call it 10G if they like its just a name, I dont care as long as the speed meets my need at a reasonable price.
because our phones are only capable 7 mbps while the g2 and the mytouch4g can go to about 14 mbps (not even 21) ... but yeah thats why ... its hardware related
spookini said:
I understand all that. But here is my newbie question:
Can the 4G TMo devices (say myTouch4G or G2) really attain quicker d/l speeds than a 3G device like Vibrant? If so, how?
I have not been able to read a clear explanation of this anywhere. Also, TMo says their network will hit 21Mbps in 2011, and that is backward compatible. If so, then why is a 4G device needed?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They are backward compatible, for example HSPA+ will give vibrant which does not support HSPA+ a speed boost, just not fully benfitted. Same story with USB 3.0 and 2.0
4G is 100 mbps and TMobile will be 21mbps. None of these networks will have 4G speeds and all in fact are upgraded 3G speeds. AT&T will be usding the same HSPA that TMobile will be using and eventually they also will be at 21 mbps.
How any of these carriers can call themselves 4G is beyond me.
Actually the 4G spec calls for 1 Gbps stationary speed, the 100 mbps is the minimum while mobile so it will be 5 years before you really see that.
T-mobiles current "4G" Network is currently running at 21 mbps, with 42 mbps a software upgrade away. So while they don't meet the true 4G speed threshold, neither does sprints current 10 mbps wimax, or verizons 12 mbps LTE. When sprint and verizon first launched their "3G" networks they didn't meet the requirements for at least a couple years, and we are not any worse off due to that flexibility.
I still roll with a 7.2 mbps vibrant and I will be honest, there has not been any time where I had good 3G speed that I needed anything more.
spookini said:
I understand all that. But here is my newbie question:
Can the 4G TMo devices (say myTouch4G or G2) really attain quicker d/l speeds than a 3G device like Vibrant? If so, how?
I have not been able to read a clear explanation of this anywhere. Also, TMo says their network will hit 21Mbps in 2011, and that is backward compatible. If so, then why is a 4G device needed?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
think back to USB 2.0
when USB 2.0 came out it allows for higher speed transfers etc....
You will only get 2.0 speeds on a 2.0 port.
The USB 2.0 device will work in a 1.0/1.1 port, but it will not give you 2.0 speeds.
if you want, just replace USB 2.0 with HSPA+
and replace 1.0/1.1 with HSPA7.2
Let me try to shed some light on things for you.
spookini said:
But here is my newbie question:
Can the 4G TMo devices (say myTouch4G or G2) really attain quicker d/l speeds than a 3G device like Vibrant? If so, how?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes. Without getting all technical, it has to do with how the data is compressed and encoded on the different channels that the phone and cell towers use.
HSPA+ is an improved version of HSPA. HSPA is an addition to UMTS 3G which allows for faster data transfer rates than just regular UMTS 3G.
I have not been able to read a clear explanation of this anywhere. Also, TMo says their network will hit 21Mbps in 2011, and that is backward compatible. If so, then why is a 4G device needed?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You won't find one unless you do some real digging and learn enough to understand some basics of UMTS. True 4G does a lot more than just give faster data rates. The entire back-end of how the cell towers and core network route information is different. The way the radios in the cell phones work is different and the way the cell towers organize data is different. The benefit is more efficient mobile communication service.
The way things are with 3G, it is difficult to balance voice traffic with the ever-increasing demand for data traffic and maintain QoS for a large number of users simultaneously. Anyone who has tried to use AT&T 3G at a football game or concert can tell you how crappy the service gets when the towers get loaded.
Yes But Marketing.......
All that tarzanman said is correct but the larger picture is just perception and controlling it.
Basically, we really do not have 3g unless you really get somewhere close to 7mg speed consistently........We do not and i am ok with my 2-3mg speed it is plenty good enough for my needs.
Here is a good analogy......when front wheel drive car first came on the market they were hailed as a breakthrough in making a car handle better allowing more room in the car and being safer. The fact is only a little more room is the real benefit and the rest....well, it is just cheaper and easier to mass produce. The car handles poorer than a rear wheel car or 4-wheel. But, they convinced most of the dopey-ignorant customers/masses and even to this day people still think they are better. Moral of the story.........control the message and control the spin, and to hell with facts........ because most don't care they just want the latest "craze jargon" on their lips so they feel cool...(sorry for the rant)
I have had a cell phone now for 27 years.......and here is my advice:
here in the USA --go with T mobile for now watch the business trends and when they start acting like Verizon and Att then look for the next up and coming carrier and then go with them.. That is the only way to have decent, reliable and fast connection speeds for a reasonable prices.
Who cares? As started in the article ITU's decisions hold no water. They have no authority and their definition is arbitrary. I'm in the product development industry, and when our end product goes through a redesign or significant optimization it gets a generation bump. We're now up to third generation. Product looks the same for the most part, but performance increased as a result of engineering changes.
For the wireless industry, all carriers are implementing significant performance increases through network upgrades. These upgrades are not 100% compatible with current generation devices. As far as I'm concerned that's worthy of a generation bump. People are splitting hairs for no reason. It's quite silly. If I were an engineer for any of the major carriers right now I would be pretty annoyed with this ITU business by now.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
It is easy,
HSDPA+ (TMO), EV-DO(Verizon), LTE(Verizon) and 802.16e Wimax(Sprint) are considered 3G Transitional.
LTE Advanced and 802.16m (WiMax "Advanced" if you want to call it that) are 4G.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP
Go to the bottom of the page and view the chart.
t1n0m3n said:
It is easy,
HSDPA+ (TMO), EV-DO(Verizon), LTE(Verizon) and 802.16e Wimax(Sprint) are considered 3G Transitional.
LTE Advanced and 802.16m (WiMax "Advanced" if you want to call it that) are 4G.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP
Go to the bottom of the page and view the chart.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Verizon can call their LTE whatever they want but the fact is it isnt as fast as TMobiles HSPA+
i rather have true unlimited 3G than some bologni 4G with a 5Gb cap. May be is too much to ask for.
Remember, Most tout 4G more or less as 4th Generation rather than true 4G. Although marketing says otherwise. It's a ploy to get your service, just like spray painting your head makes you look like you have more hair. I don't care what they call it, as long as it benefits my speeds.
For companies that have actual caps. its stupid that they are increasing the speeds that you hit your cap. So you may have better speeds to do more, but really you are just hitting your cap faster so you can pay them more money.
t1n0m3n said:
It is easy,
HSDPA+ (TMO), EV-DO(Verizon), LTE(Verizon) and 802.16e Wimax(Sprint) are considered 3G Transitional.
LTE Advanced and 802.16m (WiMax "Advanced" if you want to call it that) are 4G.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP
Go to the bottom of the page and view the chart.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol are you serious. wikipedia is not even a credible source and ANYONE can go in and change the info.
Actually, that wikipedia article is pretty spot on.
Tarzanman said:
Actually, that wikipedia article is pretty spot on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
indeed it is. And unless you want to read a few 700 page books on the differences between UMTS/WCDMA/HSPA, and LTE/LTE-a, that's about as good of a source as is available at this point.
And as to the OP - it's all about marketing. Technically speaking, 1xRTT and EDGE are both 3g technologies. But cell companies hyped up EvDO and UMTS as 3g, to simplify it for the American consumer.
And so they're marketing their next generation of networks as "4g", even though that doesn't meet up with what the ITU defines as 4G on technical terms.
Again, this is all because cell phone companies know that people buy into the hype rather than concern themselves with the details.
But in the end, who gives a damn? It's significantly faster than what people used to expect from 3g (ie 1-2mbps), so as long as the results are better, they can call it 9000G for all I care.
All of this 4G related discourse is exactly what the carriers want. Four gee shmoor gee. I'm just happy I get 3-5 mbps down where I live.
In the end, we are all just stupid pawns
Tarzanman said:
Actually, that wikipedia article is pretty spot on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It doesn't matter, wiki bashing is in vogue even if one doesn't have a clue if the article is accurate or not.
Wikipedia 4TL!
International market is getting Atrix 3G, US is getting 4G. Is there any difference? As far as I know, both versions support HSPA+.
syl0n said:
International market is getting Atrix 3G, US is getting 4G. Is there any difference? As far as I know, both versions support HSPA+.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Largely terminology. If you mean HSPA+, then no, there's no difference. Someone has hinted that the Atrix will make it to other carriers. If it goes to Verizon, we could see a version that supports LTE. Then you'll have a difference. Until then, it's HSPA+ on various frequencies (assuming there will be a European version on a quirky frequency, and assuming it hits TMo).
Sent from my Sexy Nexy, courtesy of the fine developers of Tapatalk
There is no difference at all. In Europe they don't call HSPA+ 4G, so it's not called a 4G phone there.
It's kind of weird, it's probably because of some more restrictive laws outside the US where you can't call a cat a tiger (after all, HSPA+ is NOT 4G). Otherwise, they would surely market it the same way in Canada and Europe.
PuerkitoBio said:
It's kind of weird, it's probably because of some more restrictive laws outside the US where you can't call a cat a tiger (after all, HSPA+ is NOT 4G). Otherwise, they would surely market it the same way in Canada and Europe.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The idea of US carriers calling HSPA+ 4G is that it is delivering 4G speeds using upgraded 3G technology. 14.4Mbps HSPA+ with AT&T is nearly on par with the LTE speeds we will see on Verizon initially. T-Mobile is cranking their HSPA+ up to 42Mbps or something similar. It will be some time before carriers can really flex LTE muscle, but for now there really won't be that huge of a speed difference, so all these carriers calling their data tech 4G is just marketing.
Besides, LTE is NOT 4G either by definition. LTE is more of a 3.5G technology, similar to HSPA+, but the cool thing with LTE is that over time it can be upgraded to approximately 300Mbps theoretical download speed, while HSPA+ can only be upgraded to approximately 84Mbps download speed.
LTE Advanced will be the first technically compliant 4G technology on the market, but we are still years off from seeing that in the real world.
So take everything you see about 4G as a grain of salt. Atrix 4G vs Atrix is just marketing lingo.
And when people want to say that the Droid Bionic is a real 4G device would technically be incorrect. So don't think your Atrix is in any way inferior to the Bionic (except maybe camera and screen size).
PuerkitoBio said:
It's kind of weird, it's probably because of some more restrictive laws outside the US where you can't call a cat a tiger (after all, HSPA+ is NOT 4G).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is now. Standards folks changed their minds, and as of last month or so current WiMax, current LTE, and HSPA+ are all 4G.
when i talked with my rep basically he said they were dropping the 4g just to make things easier. The phone is the same, just some people are still using the superfluous 4g tag.
Does this mean that we can buy a sim-free Atrix 4g from at&t, bring it to europe and use it with european sim cards?or any other gsm sim-cards around the world?
Po0yAn said:
Does this mean that we can buy a sim-free Atrix 4g from at&t, bring it to europe and use it with european sim cards?or any other gsm sim-cards around the world?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd really like to know that as well. Besides this the only thing preventing me from ordering an unlocked version as soon as such is available is the bootloader thing.
A_Kirsh said:
I'd really like to know that as well. Besides this the only thing preventing me from ordering an unlocked version as soon as such is available is the bootloader thing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
same here.thats why im considering galaxy s2 now. i have both moto milestone and galaxy s,the build quality of moto is way better.also my friends like the milestone build and look more,but the locked up bootloader really frustrated me.although there aren't much of great custom roms for galaxy s either,we haven't had a decent cyanogenmod rom around yet, after 8 month since galaxy s been released.
i like atrix more because of better build,higher resolution and tegra 2,but the damn bootloader and later release date along with slightly better specs for s2 like shipping with 2.3 and better camera is changing my desire.
not to mention that this time moto is using PenTile for it LCD and sami is using stripe matrix for its samoled+. thats another let down for atrix.
it was stupid from moto to change the lcd tech on atrix, stripe matrix looked great on milestone.
u can see the differences here:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4165/the-motorola-atrix-4g-preview/4
you can see im pretty confused here!if only the damn nexus s was shipped with a daul core cpu!
LockeCPM4 said:
The idea of US carriers calling HSPA+ 4G is that it is delivering 4G speeds using upgraded 3G technology. 14.4Mbps HSPA+ with AT&T is nearly on par with the LTE speeds we will see on Verizon initially. T-Mobile is cranking their HSPA+ up to 42Mbps or something similar. It will be some time before carriers can really flex LTE muscle, but for now there really won't be that huge of a speed difference, so all these carriers calling their data tech 4G is just marketing.
Besides, LTE is NOT 4G either by definition. LTE is more of a 3.5G technology, similar to HSPA+, but the cool thing with LTE is that over time it can be upgraded to approximately 300Mbps theoretical download speed, while HSPA+ can only be upgraded to approximately 84Mbps download speed.
LTE Advanced will be the first technically compliant 4G technology on the market, but we are still years off from seeing that in the real world.
So take everything you see about 4G as a grain of salt. Atrix 4G vs Atrix is just marketing lingo.
And when people want to say that the Droid Bionic is a real 4G device would technically be incorrect. So don't think your Atrix is in any way inferior to the Bionic (except maybe camera and screen size).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just thought I'd correct you. Tmobile has claimed they can reach speeds of up to 672mbps with their HSPA+ tech. Honestly with speeds like that is there any real need for LTE?
"Now we're seeing a chart of T-Mobile's 4G evolution on the HSPA+ technology path, starting with 21Mbps in 2010. We're seeing 28, 42, 84, 168, and 672Mbps bars here as we move through dual-carrier, MIMO, and so on."
http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/06/live-from-t-mobiles-ces-2011-press-event/
svengalis said:
"Now we're seeing a chart of T-Mobile's 4G evolution on the HSPA+ technology path, starting with 21Mbps in 2010. We're seeing 28, 42, 84, 168, and 672Mbps bars here as we move through dual-carrier, MIMO, and so on."
http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/06/live-from-t-mobiles-ces-2011-press-event/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is basically LTE. They will be switching to it eventually, and these technologies is what makes up most of it.
Just to make sure everyone's aware. Without a huge picocell/femtocell underlay, you will never see anything over 6-12 meg on an LTE network.
The difference between atrix 4g and atrix for europe could be regarding frequencies: 4g shold be 3g on frequencies 850/1900/2100 while european version 850/900/1900/2100. This should be not a problem because almost in all europe 3g works on 2100 Mhz frequency. What do you think about it?
mercuryzzz said:
The difference between atrix 4g and atrix for europe could be regarding frequencies: 4g shold be 3g on frequencies 850/1900/2100 while european version 850/900/1900/2100. This should be not a problem because almost in all europe 3g works on 2100 Mhz frequency. What do you think about it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since most 3G GSM operates in the 2100MHZ area nowadays, I don't this this is too much of a problem (if I'm wrong could someone please correct me?)
I'm now curious as to what exactly is the unlock procedure (sim-wise) of an att Atrix... Can anyone please explain (in detail) ?
Which service is best...
Sent from my HTC Sensation
It probably depends on the area. DC-HSPA on T-Mobile actually runs faster than Verizon LTE in some areas just because Verizon doesn't open it up enough or have enough capacity or something. The nice part is that DC-HSPA is really just a fast 3G, so even if your phone only hits 14.4 HSPA, it still goes pretty fast. T-Mobile will deploy LTE next year and if that has problems it will have DC-HSPA as a fallback.
I have T-mobile and I easily get 22mbps down, 2mbps up. My husband has Verizon and he gets 23mbps down, 7mbps up. The downlink speeds are comparable. The only difference is in the uplink speeds. Verizon has the edge here. However, I have used both phones side by side and for most tasks, there isn't a huge difference.
Snowflake approved this message....
4G Late?
4G LTE
-Destroys Battery life
-Sales Gimmick
4G HSPA+
-Fast enough
-Better battery life
Can anybody really distinguish, with the naked eye, which is faster? Whose testing website is really accurate? Besides bragging rights and marketing fanfare, does it make any difference?
Hi guys,
I do not need LTE due to those facts:
1) HSDPA is fast enough.
2) in common cell phone contracts over here in Germany your speed is reduced to 64kbit after you used up 300mb per month. If I had more than that we could talk about LTE.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda app-developers app
Looneytoon98 said:
Can anybody really distinguish, with the naked eye, which is faster? Whose testing website is really accurate? Besides bragging rights and marketing fanfare, does it make any difference?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope.
Snowflake approved this message
LTE plans here are more expensive. That's a good reason.
Sent from my XT883 using xda app-developers app
LTE not Late
Mesaman2012 said:
Which service is best...
Sent from my HTC Sensation
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
FYI there is no "Late 4G", it is called "LTE". Actually there are two types of 4G; LTE and WiMax.
LTE was first used by Verizon, but is now also used by ATT. Due to marketing "schemes" some believe the Apple iPhone 5 has 4g. False! it has HSPA+, not 4G/ Sure, HSPA+ is a ton faster than 3g, but it is still not 4G.
Sprint, and T-Mobile are now also starting to use LTE. Unfortunately I don't believe LTE is standard worldwide, meaning they use different frequency bands. Similar to how a GSM american phone, may or may not work in Europe
I'm sorry that I ever put up such a topic would you ladies and gentlemen please not respond to this stupid topic.I would like to apologize for spamming the thread with this ignorant topic. Takecare
Sent from my HTC one x
Either way, we won't be hitting 4G for another 5/10 years. Although, I can't imagine why the hell a phone needs 1Gbps down and 100Mbps up. Maybe 30 years from now those speeds will be standard.
LTE and WiMax are still 3G. They're marketed as 4G (read: FauxG). They're really 3.9G.
Only LTE-Advanced is a certified 4G tech. All the others are still 3G
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda app-developers app
times_infinity said:
LTE and WiMax are still 3G. They're marketed as 4G (read: FauxG). They're really 3.9G.
Only LTE-Advanced is a certified 4G tech. All the others are still 3G
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know that was the case originally, but it's my understanding that the group behind the 4G standards was pushed enough to bend what it qualifies as 4G. Originally 4G was when you had a minimum of 100Mbps download, but now HSPA+, WiMax, and LTE are all considered 4G technologies.
geoff5093 said:
I know that was the case originally, but it's my understanding that the group behind the 4G standards was pushed enough to bend what it qualifies as 4G. Originally 4G was when you had a minimum of 100Mbps download, but now HSPA+, WiMax, and LTE are all considered 4G technologies.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
By name only. The carriers cried and whined for it, so the ITU caved. It's STILL "faux G" as far as many people are concerned.
Call it whatever you want. It doesn't change the fact that it's still technically based on an older technology.
Snowflake approved this message....
Would prefer HSPA than 4G. On 4G, it's really a battery eater. However, the highest HSPA speed I've gotten was around 3mbps and around 1-2mbps upload compared to 30-45mbps download and ~20-30mbps upload.
Normally the HSPA speeds is almost the same as running on GPRS during peak hours until the three local telco was fined for providing below standard data speeds/coverage then it managed to peak around 4-5.
Clubbysupercharged said:
Would prefer HSPA than 4G. On 4G, it's really a battery eater. However, the highest HSPA speed I've gotten was around 3mbps and around 1-2mbps upload compared to 30-45mbps download and ~20-30mbps upload.
Normally the HSPA speeds is almost the same as running on GPRS during peak hours until the three local telco was fined for providing below standard data speeds/coverage then it managed to peak around 4-5.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's your carrier. I've seen HSPA speeds hit 20Mb down and LTE speeds hit 60Mb down almost from seeing other speedtests.
MrObvious said:
That's your carrier. I've seen HSPA speeds hit 20Mb down and LTE speeds hit 60Mb down almost from seeing other speedtests.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or his location (or the hardware limitation of the handset)
Hickory, Dickory, Dox...Snowflake approves of my HOX....
MrObvious said:
That's your carrier. I've seen HSPA speeds hit 20Mb down and LTE speeds hit 60Mb down almost from seeing other speedtests.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know, that's my carrier problem. Their HSPA speeds is really pathetic.
Thanks for sharing
LTE>HSPA+
My best friend bought the black Iphone five (64 gig) when he came down to Jax, and in town, we compared our speed test results.
Iphone five (lte on at&t) first test- 68 mbps down/16 mbps up
Htc Amaze (faux g) best result that day-23mbps down/3 mbps up
So, strictly speed wise, he consistently was able to pull high 60's down, while my phone that theoretically can hit 42 mbps, never reached 30's. So it seems that location is an important factor, but none the less, I cant kid myself, I rooted my phone and changed the values in the build.prop file to command the phone to max out the radio, while his was straight out of the box. Imagine if he were to jailbreak that monster, its capable of 80 mbps down. The only problem is that his screen is smaller than mine, and he has some crappy plan that wont let him tether, as oposed to us, we can hack out phones to utilize our signal on something easier on the eyes.
Now bear in mind, I am just commenting on data speed, and he is back in Greensboro, North Carolina, and he only gets 20mbps down at best. Then again, 20 mbps down would be my phone on a good day in the middle of the night.